Stuff

This morning’s YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 32%, LAB 41%, LDEM 11%, UKIP 9%. The change is very small, but YouGov’s reported level of Lib Dem support does seem to have crept up slightly over the last month or two – the average Lib Dem score in YouGov’s December polls was over 10 for the first time since 2010, and the four polls so far this year have all had them at 10 or above.

Personally I think Ed Balls is very able, as likely as anyone to be right about the economy, and much more likely to be so than G. O. That said, it seems to me that he has been tarred by the (in my view unfair) hatred that became attached to Gordon Brown. So it might make sense for Labour to enable him to set the policy and then replace him with someone who is seen as a safer pair hands. I would regret this but it wouldn’t affect my vote and might affect the vote of some others.

Two points about the possible results at the next General Election in Scotland. Firstly, if the 2014 referendum results in a substantial No vote (say 60% or more)[1], then that may curiously make the SNP more electable. The main SNP policy that people feel uncertain about will have been neutered, so it will be ‘safer’ to vote for them.

The second point is that Scotland has a tendency to vote against Westminster – as already pointed out they swung to Labour in 2010. So if Labour seem certain to regain power in the UK , there may be a move against them, supplemented by tactical votes from Tories and Lib Dems. In addition there will no longer be a feeling among most voters than they need vote Labour to protect them from the Conservatives and that the SNP would best represent Scottish interests in London.

This assumes that the SNP wouldn’t implode after a strong No result or retreat into tartan-clad gesture politics, but that seems unlikely under current form.

[1] Which is currently looking like what will happen. It depends entirely on what Scottish voters see the economic prospects of an independent country being, but the SNP will have to make a very strong case for things being substantially and permanently better after separation and I can’t see it happening. People always vote conservatively in referendums unless given very good reasons to change things.

Given that only about a third would currently vote Yes, and that opinion tends to shift to the status quo as polling day gets nearer, a 60% plus No result seems likely. Of course Cameron could announce that if Union continues he will deport the entire Scottish population to Darien and turn the country into his personal deer park, but otherwise…

There was a referendum in 1973? I realize this is probably a typing error, but it matters, because, with the exception of the 2 referenda in 1979, all the others you list happened after general elections, so the point I think Alec was making still stands – the referenda prior to an election did have an effect.

As I mentioned, Government stats are that 20% of households don’t have home internet access. And that’s *no access at all* at home. To feel comfortable with online shopping, you really need an always-on broadband access rather than dial-up. As hard as it is for us to imagine, low income households may very well make the choice that they don’t want to pay for that. It may well be that percentage will *increase* as more households on the lower end have to cut back to absolute necessity.

These low income households were where the likes of HMV have been counting on to keep them afloat. So of course they’re going to be double-hit by those households having to tighten their belts even further. This is precisely why I assume HMV will be one of the ones to go under soon.

Incidentally, one of IDS’s big saving schemes is to move all welfare applications Online and entirely do away with all alternative methods of application.

Incidentally, one of IDS’s big saving schemes is to move all welfare applications Online and entirely do away with all alternative methods of application.
——————-
With a decent IT system (I’m not saying it will be), this could really encourage take up of benefits! Imagine you can sit in the privacy of your own home, a citizen’s advice bureau or similar place of assistance & have a go at claiming something.

Younger people will try it, just for fun. e.g. Oh look, I should be getting housing benefit & I’d never have thought of claiming, if I had to write or actually go to an office to get a form.

I’d imagine employees who have successfully made a claim will help other employees during breaks etc. I have seen this in the workplace before. Nobody wants to help with written tests, paperwork or form filling but people will offer to help with computerized versions because they enjoy ‘showing off’ their skill.

And if the system is good enough to give error messages when a mistake is made, they can be corrected at once instead of claims being rejected by mail weeks later because of a ‘silly’ mistake & then the entire form having to be filled out again.

The main thing will be for employers, citizens advice bureaus, charities & socially aware businesses to provide access & also help to the vulnerable who cannot do it themselves.

@colin & NickP – this Heywood mauling does raise some significant issues for the future I feel. We regularly see PM refer questions of conduct to him for investigation, as in this case. I’ve never been very impressed with these ‘investigations’ as they seem more of a long grass exercise than an independent attempt to find the truth.

Now that this skim over the facts has been roundly exposed as a deeply flawed process, that may have cost a minister his career, I very much doubt any future investigation by Heywood will be given any respect at all by opponents.

I think this is a major negative, as politics really should be more about higher things than arguments over process, procedure and behaviour, but Heywood’s dreadful performance will ensure that any future ‘scandal’ gets much harder to put to bed.

@Amberstar – that’s a very good point. I know a few people who have come into contact with benefits agencies recently, and the common perception is that visits to offices are designed to be mindless, long winded and off putting to claimants, with the strong sense that this is used as one way of deterring claims.

The problem is that this isn’t as well as the traditional methods of applying, it’s instead of. And that 20% without home internet access is the group more likely to need to claim benefits.
—————————-
I agree that this is a major issue.

I am optimistic that a support network can be put in place. This may be something which the Unions & Labour community outreach teams can get involved in, together with e.g. Age Concern & other NGOs.

But in 1997, opinion increasingly shifted away from the status quo as the campaign proceeded, as opposed to 1979 where the narrow Yes majority in the referendum was less than opinion polls have suggested.

There’s no evidence that Scotland will swing away from Labour if they are likely to get in in 2015. Their result 1997 was their best in SCotland since the 60s, with a large swing towards them, yet it was obvious for some time that they were going to get in.

I’m not saying that it will be repeated in 2015, but you cant say the opposite and that their vote will drop because they will get in power.

Did opinion shift away from the status quo in 97, or was it always against the status quo?

I cant recall the SNP’s position on devolution in their May 97 manifesto, but it was certainly in the Labour and Lib Dem ones to implement the constitutional convention devolution proposals – and thats 60% of the voters who were presumably wanting devolution?

Which kinda makes my point – there wasnt a swing away from the status quo. The support for change was always there. What tends to happen is undecided voters make their mind up – or dont bother to vote despite telling pollsters they might.

That is worrying but I imagine that folk will be able to use the computers at the local library if they don’t close them down!!

On the subject of benefit claim forms, my experience is that being asked 20 times in subtle different ways if you are a layabout con artist, is very bad for your self esteem and perversely rots the moral fibre, you can feel it rotting as you fill on the forms. It’s the main reason that I’m so against means testing. Oddly if you tell folk that that they are lazy, feckless, thieving bastards they tend to act that way.

I foresee endless hours of enjoyment watching the campaign, especially as practically everyone prominent in the No campaign hates everyone else in it[1] and they all have very different political visions for Scotland. But I’m not sure that campaigns make much difference except when things are tight. By the time the formal campaign starts most people will have made their mind up and the remainder will tend to shift to the status quo.

The problem that the Nationalists have is the basic asymmetry of the situation. They have to persuade people that an independent Scotland will be better, will continue to be so and that the improvement will be worth all the hassle of changing things. All the No campaign has to do is get voters to think that some of this may not be true.

OldNat points to the 1997 referenda as an exception to the ‘conservative’ rule, but as John Reddy implies, by then Devolution had sort of become the status quo and it was more about formally endorsing the decision made in the General Election earlier in the year.

Of course we’re speaking of tendencies and there are always exceptions, but the Yes campaign will need to do a lot of persuading to get the result they want. The chance to annoy a few Little Englanders won’t be enough incentive, particularly as the latter actually seem keen to get rid of anyone North of the Border – or indeed Watford.

Similarly it may well be that a there is a further swing to Labour in Scotland at the next election, as in 1997. But back then the Tories still had 11 seats to lose (which they did). They no longer pose any threat and voters may feel freer about where to put their support.

It was Amber’s go – I was waiting for her so that she didn’t sulk ike a soppy gurl.
————————
LOL!

I was trying shopping online with Waitrose ‘cos new people are getting a £20 discount. It took me bl**dy hours.

I hate online shopping; getting a load of stuff in a Waitrose store takes minutes because their layout is superb & their checkout partners are so fast at swiping & packing. Their website is better than most but it still takes ages if you don’t know where things are!

I think you have got it right in predicting a Labour and union active support for the IT-less 20% in benefit claim and also that this might presage an overdue spreading of access to IT ; but what are the figures for illiteracy, drug or alcohol dependency, homelessness, agedness and handicap in the 20% I don[t see this as a negative in an IT access movement – it could be an effective vehicle for a more general and incisive poverty reduction.

“I foresee endless hours of enjoyment watching the campaign, especially as practically everyone prominent in the No campaign hates everyone else in it[1] and they all have very different political visions for Scotland. But I’m not sure that campaigns make much difference except when things are tight.”